Back Room Front Room 2

16
ENTERPRISE INFORMATION SYSTEMS VI
problems by principals. This can trigger an iterative
reconsideration of the current solution space and its
anomalies resulting in a process called problem
blossoming 15 . This iterative process can change the
contents, and hence, the structure, of the current
solution space (St) as well as the problem space (Pt).
This process may have to be iterated as long as new
affected areas of St are being discovered and the
corresponding anomalies, and resulting problems,
are constructed and organized into the current
problem space. Once complete, or prematurely
stopped by a principal with standing due to the fear
of endless search, the resulting problem set is called
Pt. 16
3.5 Proposed Solution
A Proposed Solution, denoted as St+1, forms a new
subspace of the solution space. A proposed solution
by definition implies the reconciliation of St to Pt. In
other words, each part of a proposed solution must
be reconciled with one or more problems in Pt until
all of the problems in Pt are addressed. The process
of reconciliation, changing St into St+1 17 by solving
for Pt, is called Solution Space Transformation.
Finding this mapping forms the heart of RE. It
involves specifying a mapping from a current
solution space into a future solution space that is
contextualized, or warranted, by the chosen set of
problems. In other words, the analyst's job is at the
intersection of the two solution spaces (along with
technologies embedded in them) and the problem
space. During this reconciliation process, constraints
are seen as limitations of current organizational
resources as well as limitations concerning the future
IS, including people, artifacts, rules, processes and
the like.
It is a custom desire in the RE literature to find an
optimum path from St to St+1. This is, however,
seldom the case in any given requirements analysis
effort, because 1) the prospect of attaining global
solutions is quite remote due to changing and
shifting needs and goals of the principals, problem
blossoming etc, and 2) because system analysts
cannot locally foresee the impact of the chosen
solution spaces or the difficulty of getting there due
to their cognitive and resource limits. The task of the
analyst is, instead, to find a traversable path from a
current solution space to a new one that meets
sufficiently the requirement of removing observed
problems (Haumer, Heymans et al., 1999). This
needs to be accomplished also by identifying
problems that will arise during the process of
transformation.
A necessary outcome of the solution space
transformation is to transform, and possibly expand,
the local solution space, St. Transforming St means
not only changing, and hence a likely expanding
some principals’ technical capability. It also means a
changing, and presumptively by expansion, the
organizational capability within the solution space.
Hence, an expansion of St can reveal previously
unavailable, but now realizable opportunities. The
process can even expand a general solution space,
and thus demonstrate organizational learning and
innovation in the sense that new solution “frames”
have been created (Lyytinen, Rose et al., 1998a) 18 .
3.6 Redefining Requirements
Per our analysis, RE activity involves always a
deliberate construction of an ecology that consists of
two solution spaces and a problem space 19 . The
objective of RE is to reconcile all essential aspects
of the current solution space with regard to a
problem space thus producing a specification for a
particular solution space that can be achieved at
some future time point t+x 20 . It is expected that this
will mitigate or eliminate the identified problem
space (though naturally this cannot be guaranteed).
Due to the discovery of goals, problem blossoming
and dynamics of the solution spaces, this is an
iterative process: new information on both the
solution space and the problem space is continually
discovered, and consequently decisions need to be
continually made to re-state both the solution space
and the problem space in the direction of
reconciliation. The RE specification is thus an
outcome of a co-evolutionary process of discovery
and decision, in which both the solution space and
the problems space are iteratively constructed. This
process is influenced by many constraints arising
from the environment itself (e.g., physical laws,
technical choices, legal considerations, institutional
influences, organizational goals and capabilities,
market forces). But, at the bottom, it remains a social
process of negotiation and inquiry that is constrained
by bounded rationality and limited organizational
resources.
At this point of our treatise we can contrast this
definition of RE with the “received” definition that
is common to the requirements engineering
literature. As previously stated a requirement as per
this literature is:
1. A condition or capability needed by a user to
solve a problem or achieve an objective.
2. A condition or capability that must be met or
possessed by a system or a system component to
satisfy a contract, standard, specification, or
other formally imposed document.